DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 101219--------------------------------------------------
Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: tankmania
Date: December 5, 2025, 10:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello All.
I would be very grateful for your advice for a PCN I recently
received.
I had a hire car. The Driver was parked in a Church car park for
10 minutes and 30 seconds. The Driver had driven in off the main
road to sort out the sat nav. The date of the PCN was 17th Nov
2025. The Hirer received an email from the hire car company
dated 24th Nov with summary details of the PCN they received
from Parking Eye, and their admin charge.
On 1st Dec the Hirer received the PCN (Issued 20th Nov and dated
27th Nov) in the post directly from Parking Eye. £100 or £60 if
paid within 14 days.
When the Driver drove into the car park there was no lighting
around the building at all. It was like pitch black. Sunset on
this date was around 4pm. The Driver remembers one floodlight
coming on driving out of the location.
Photographs of the site were taken one evening. One cannot see
ANY of the signs without a torch. Whilst some signs were fixed
very high on a pole, others were lower down and attached to a
fence. None could be seen because there was no lighting anywhere
around the car park.
There was a sign on a pole at the entrance, however, it was not
seen by the Driver at the time, and the Driver did not stop
there anyway as it was not safe to do so. The Driver turned left
into the location and the sign was on the right side of the
entrance. It does state parking is for patrons only (it
specifies the times), and, it also states parking is for patrons
ONLY outside of those times.
All photographs taken had to be with the night function on the
camera, otherwise nothing can be seen, including the signs.
You can see from the ANPR photographs only the number plates can
be seen.
So far at the time of writing it has been 16 days since the date
of issue (20th Nov).
The Hirer has not received any other correspondence from Parking
Eye so far, and, neither have they contacted them.
The Hirer has read POFA but is a little confused over the law
regards hire cars/agreements.
Thanking you in anticipation of your advice.
#Post#: 101220--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: jfollows
Date: December 5, 2025, 11:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/posting-images/#new
#Post#: 101253--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: b789
Date: December 6, 2025, 7:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
When you received the Notice that was addressed to you from
Parkingeye (not a copy of the Notice to Keeper (NtK) addressed
to the hire/lease company), did it include copies of the
following documents with it?
[indent](a) A statement signed by or on behalf of the
vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the
vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
(b) A copy of the hire agreement; and
(c) A copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under
that hire agreement.[/indent]
I'm going to assume not, because these parking firms never do
so, in breach of PoFA which means that they cannot hold the
Hirer liable if the driver is not identified. However, I can see
from your post that you are a bit naive about the requirement
that you must never, EVER, identify the driver. Silly use of
wording like "I did this or that", instead of "the driver did
this or that" are the typical ways that most people proverbially
blast both feet off with a single shot.
Whilst we wait to se both sides of the Notice your received
(probably a Notice to Hirer (NtH)) and also the copy of the
original Notice to Keeper (NtK) that you received from thew Hire
firm, you should appeal ONLY in your capacity as the Hirer
(there is no legal obligation on you to identify the driver to
an unregulated private parking firm) with the following wording.
Do not try and be clever and edit anything. Appeal verbatim:
--- Quote ---
> I am the Hirer of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking
charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I
will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your
client landowner.
>
> As your Notice to Hirer (NtH) does not fully comply with ALL
the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the Hirer
of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even
substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no
admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions
can be drawn. Parkingeye has relied on contract law allegations
of breach against the driver only.
>
> The Hirer cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the
driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law
of agency. Your NtH can only hold the driver liable. Parkingeye
have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a
complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
--- End Quote ---
They will come back to you with some rubbish about how you must
give them the drivers details, which you can simply respond with
the following:
--- Quote ---
> Your latest request for driver details is noted and dismissed.
As the Hirer, I am under no legal obligation to identify the
driver, and you are well aware of this. Continuing to pester me
for information you cannot compel is a waste of both our time.
Either cancel the PCN or issue a POPLA code—where your chances
of success are nil.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 101281--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: tankmania
Date: December 6, 2025, 10:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jfollows link ---
>
>
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
>
>
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/posting-images/#new
>
--- End Quote ---
Thank you very much. I overlooked the photo upload advice. I
will work on that asap.
#Post#: 101285--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: tankmania
Date: December 6, 2025, 10:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> When you received the Notice that was addressed to you from
Parkingeye (not a copy of the Notice to Keeper (NtK) addressed
to the hire/lease company), did it include copies of the
following documents with it?
>
> [indent](a) A statement signed by or on behalf of the
vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the
vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
>
> (b) A copy of the hire agreement; and
>
> (c) A copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer
under that hire agreement.[/indent]
>
> I'm going to assume not, because these parking firms never do
so, in breach of PoFA which means that they cannot hold the
Hirer liable if the driver is not identified. However, I can see
from your post that you are a bit naive about the requirement
that you must never, EVER, identify the driver. Silly use of
wording like "I did this or that", instead of "the driver did
this or that" are the typical ways that most people proverbially
blast both feet off with a single shot.
>
> Whilst we wait to se both sides of the Notice your received
(probably a Notice to Hirer (NtH)) and also the copy of the
original Notice to Keeper (NtK) that you received from thew Hire
firm, you should appeal ONLY in your capacity as the Hirer
(there is no legal obligation on you to identify the driver to
an unregulated private parking firm) with the following wording.
Do not try and be clever and edit anything. Appeal verbatim:
>
> [quote]I am the Hirer of the vehicle and I dispute your
'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement
and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to
your client landowner.
>
> As your Notice to Hirer (NtH) does not fully comply with ALL
the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the Hirer
of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even
substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no
admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions
can be drawn. Parkingeye has relied on contract law allegations
of breach against the driver only.
>
> The Hirer cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the
driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law
of agency. Your NtH can only hold the driver liable. Parkingeye
have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a
complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
--- End Quote ---
They will come back to you with some rubbish about how you must
give them the drivers details, which you can simply respond with
the following:
--- Quote ---
> Your latest request for driver details is noted and dismissed.
As the Hirer, I am under no legal obligation to identify the
driver, and you are well aware of this. Continuing to pester me
for information you cannot compel is a waste of both our time.
Either cancel the PCN or issue a POPLA code—where your chances
of success are nil.
--- End Quote ---
[/quote]
Hello. Thank you for the time you have taken to advise me. I
really appreciate it. I have edited the post. I will upload the
photo's as links asap.
The Hirer has only received the PCN from Parking Eye.
#Post#: 101288--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: b789
Date: December 6, 2025, 11:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Then simply send the appeal as advised.
#Post#: 102260--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: tankmania
Date: December 13, 2025, 1:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: tankmania link ---
>
> Hello All.
>
> I would be very grateful for your advice for a PCN I recently
received.
>
> I had a hire car. The Driver was parked in a Church car park
for 10 minutes and 30 seconds. The Driver had driven in off the
main road to sort out the sat nav. The date of the PCN was 17th
Nov 2025. The Hirer received an email from the hire car company
dated 24th Nov with summary details of the PCN they received
from Parking Eye, and their admin charge.
>
> On 1st Dec the Hirer received the PCN (Issued 20th Nov and
dated 27th Nov) in the post directly from Parking Eye. £100 or
£60 if paid within 14 days.
>
> When the Driver drove into the car park there was no lighting
around the building at all. It was like pitch black. Sunset on
this date was around 4pm. The Driver remembers one floodlight
coming on driving out of the location.
>
> Photographs of the site were taken one evening. One cannot see
ANY of the signs without a torch. Whilst some signs were fixed
very high on a pole, others were lower down and attached to a
fence. None could be seen because there was no lighting anywhere
around the car park.
>
> There was a sign on a pole at the entrance, however, it was
not seen by the Driver at the time, and the Driver did not stop
there anyway as it was not safe to do so. The Driver turned left
into the location and the sign was on the right side of the
entrance. It does state parking is for patrons only (it
specifies the times), and, it also states parking is for patrons
ONLY outside of those times.
>
> All photographs taken had to be with the night function on the
camera, otherwise nothing can be seen, including the signs.
>
> You can see from the ANPR photographs only the number plates
can be seen.
>
> So far at the time of writing it has been 16 days since the
date of issue (20th Nov).
>
> The Hirer has not received any other correspondence from
Parking Eye so far, and, neither have they contacted them.
>
> The Hirer has read POFA but is a little confused over the law
regards hire cars/agreements.
>
> Thanking you in anticipation of your advice.
>
--- End Quote ---
I have uploaded photo's of the location, and the PCN, also an
emailed letter fom the car hire company.
HTML https://ibb.co/N2b50tw8
HTML https://ibb.co/jPMt5JK6
HTML https://ibb.co/NnbxL7BB
HTML https://ibb.co/YBxJn24x
HTML https://ibb.co/QsYMBMD
HTML https://ibb.co/prbfw5qX
HTML https://ibb.co/B5T8c7sr
HTML https://ibb.co/9kYKsVKK
HTML https://ibb.co/bgFyTvLG
HTML https://ibb.co/ynPckgPp
HTML https://ibb.co/Xf0vqkcS
HTML https://ibb.co/gLwm58tS
HTML https://ibb.co/GQwL28JC
HTML https://ibb.co/ghXRDR8
HTML https://ibb.co/tMhmjXvs
HTML https://ibb.co/RGrxjXFJ
HTML https://ibb.co/60jPrsvC
HTML https://ibb.co/NdcVbsNf
HTML https://ibb.co/gLrn3HHd
HTML https://ibb.co/Gf2cd7Vj
HTML https://ibb.co/1GwvkTH0
HTML https://ibb.co/tMbC9mnX
HTML https://ibb.co/ZR0kPV1f
HTML https://ibb.co/Q7KD998b
#Post#: 102262--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: tankmania
Date: December 13, 2025, 1:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> Then simply send the appeal as advised.
>
--- End Quote ---
Hi.
Should I wait to appeal until 28 days (it says from the date of
issue/delivered date). I received a reminder from Parking Eye in
the post, there is nothing different on it.Just hoping nothing
else comes through as you stated re. hire agreement, etc.
Also, at this stage should I add any other factors such as the
car park was unlit, and no signs were visible in the dark.
Should I upload any such evidence with the appeal? If I had
taken photo's without night mode on they would be no way of
making anything out.
Thank you.
#Post#: 102263--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: tankmania
Date: December 13, 2025, 1:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: tankmania link ---
>
> Hello All.
>
> I would be very grateful for your advice for a PCN I recently
received.
>
> I had a hire car. The Driver was parked in a Church car park
for 10 minutes and 30 seconds. The Driver had driven in off the
main road to sort out the sat nav. The date of the PCN was 17th
Nov 2025. The Hirer received an email from the hire car company
dated 24th Nov with summary details of the PCN they received
from Parking Eye, and their admin charge.
>
> On 1st Dec the Hirer received the PCN (Issued 20th Nov and
dated 27th Nov) in the post directly from Parking Eye. £100 or
£60 if paid within 14 days.
>
> When the Driver drove into the car park there was no lighting
around the building at all. It was like pitch black. Sunset on
this date was around 4pm. The Driver remembers one floodlight
coming on driving out of the location.
>
> Photographs of the site were taken one evening. One cannot see
ANY of the signs without a torch. Whilst some signs were fixed
very high on a pole, others were lower down and attached to a
fence. None could be seen because there was no lighting anywhere
around the car park.
>
> There was a sign on a pole at the entrance, however, it was
not seen by the Driver at the time, and the Driver did not stop
there anyway as it was not safe to do so. The Driver turned left
into the location and the sign was on the right side of the
entrance. It does state parking is for patrons only (it
specifies the times), and, it also states parking is for patrons
ONLY outside of those times.
>
> All photographs taken had to be with the night function on the
camera, otherwise nothing can be seen, including the signs.
>
> You can see from the ANPR photographs only the number plates
can be seen.
>
> So far at the time of writing it has been 16 days since the
date of issue (20th Nov).
>
> The Hirer has not received any other correspondence from
Parking Eye so far, and, neither have they contacted them.
>
> The Hirer has read POFA but is a little confused over the law
regards hire cars/agreements.
>
> Thanking you in anticipation of your advice.
>
--- End Quote ---
Google Street View
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/S2fi9d8SW2zeiqwt5?g_st=ac
#Post#: 102286--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - ANPR Church Car Park Patrons Only - Sale
DIR By: b789
Date: December 13, 2025, 6:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please stop "quoting" whole chunks of previous replies. They
just make reading this very tedious.
Do not wait to send the initial appeal to ParkingEye. Just get
it sent, using email or their web portal if necessary. What you
need to get is their rejection with a POPLA code. You will use
your photographic evidence for that appeal, together with the
most fundamental point that you cannot be liable if the driver
is not identified.
Your evidence of the state of the car park at night is very good
and will come in useful later. However, please confirm that the
copy of the PCN dated 27/11/2025 is actually addressed to you.
Also, please confirm whether there were copies of a statement
signed by or on behalf of the Enterprise to the effect that at
the material time the vehicle was hired to you under a hire
agreement, a copy of the hire agreement and a copy of a
statement of liability signed by you under that hire agreement.
Based on what you have described and the evidence you have
gathered, your signage and lighting evidence is very strong, and
it goes well beyond a typical “poor signage” argument. Even if a
POPLA appeal were not successful (which can happen even where
the underlying case is sound), this is exactly the sort of
evidence that would cause a claimant serious difficulty in
court.
The key point is not simply what the sign says in daylight, but
whether any alleged contractual terms were capable of being
brought to the Driver’s attention at the time. You have clear
evidence that the car park was effectively unlit. It was dark by
the time the vehicle entered, the area was “pitch black”, and
photographs taken later show that none of the signs are visible
without using a torch or night-mode camera. That is fatal to the
idea of contract formation. A driver cannot accept terms that
they cannot see, read, or reasonably be expected to know about.
In court, a judge will look at the real-world conditions at the
time, not at a neatly photographed sign taken in ideal lighting.
The ANPR images help you rather than them. They show only number
plates and confirm the absence of usable lighting. There is no
contemporaneous evidence from ParkingEye showing that any sign
was readable at the material time. That leaves them unable to
prove that the terms were adequately communicated before or
during the alleged parking period.
The entrance sign point is also important. You have explained
that the sign is on the right-hand side of the entrance, the
Driver turned left, did not stop at the entrance, and could not
safely stop there in any event. In darkness, with no lighting,
that sign simply cannot be relied upon as a contractual “offer”.
If the operator’s case depends on an entrance sign, they must
show that it was positioned, illuminated and readable so that a
driver could reasonably be expected to see and understand it.
Your evidence points in the opposite direction.
There is a further structural problem for them in the wording of
the sign itself. It is headed “Customer Only Car Park” and
repeatedly states that parking is for Holy Family Church patrons
only. That is not an open offer to the world; it is
permission-based and class-restricted. In court, this supports
the argument that the sign does not offer parking on terms to
non-patrons at all. If there is no offer, there can be no
contract. At most, they would be alleging trespass, which a
private parking company has no standing to pursue as a
contractual charge.
Finally, the short duration and purpose of the stop reinforces
your position. The vehicle was present for just over ten minutes
while the Driver sorted out sat nav directions. Even if
ParkingEye tries to characterise that as “parking”, they would
still have to prove that, within that brief period and in
pitch-black conditions, the Driver saw, read and accepted the
terms. Your photos make that proposition highly implausible.
Taken together, this is the sort of evidence that courts take
seriously. POPLA can sometimes get things wrong or apply a very
narrow view of signage, but a judge will assess credibility,
lighting conditions, visibility and common sense. On the
evidence you have, ParkingEye would be taking a significant risk
by litigating. If they were stupid enough to try, they would be
facing a very uncomfortable time explaining how an unlit car
park, unreadable signage and a patrons-only sign could ever have
formed a binding contract in the circumstances you describe.
You should also send the following to Enterprise and do not let
them charge you their £35 admin fee unless they can evidence
that PCNs from unregulated private parking firms fall under
their "fines and penalties" clause:
--- Quote ---
> Subject: Your “traffic violation/ fine/issuing authority”
email re ParkingEye – incorrect, misleading, and not accepted
>
> Dear Enterprise Traffic Violations Team,
>
> I write as the Hirer in respect of your attachment dated 24
November 2025 (reference: [ENTERPRISE REF]) concerning an
allegation by ParkingEye at Holy Family Church, Sale.
>
> Your correspondence is riddled with inaccurate terminology and
misleading statements. ParkingEye is not an “issuing authority”.
This is not a “traffic violation”, “citation”, or “fine”. There
is no “offence”. There is no police process. ParkingEye is an
unregulated private parking firm issuing a Parking Charge Notice
(PCN) which is, in plain English, a speculative invoice alleging
a breach of civil contract terms on private land.
>
> Accordingly:
>
> [indent]1. Do not misstate liability.
>
> Your email asserts “we are notifying you of your liability.”
That is not your determination to make, and it is plainly wrong
in the context of a private parking invoice. Liability (if any)
is disputed and depends on contract, signage, and evidence.
>
> 2. Stop referring to “re-issuing a fine” and “reduced
amounts”.
>
> ParkingEye cannot “re-issue a fine”. If anything is sent to
me, it would be a Notice to Hirer/PCN as part of a civil claim
process, not a statutory enforcement process.
>
> 3. You have no basis to mention the Police.
>
> Your paragraph about “speeding offences” and responding to
Police is irrelevant, inappropriate, and suggests your process
is a copy-and-paste template applied without care. This matter
is labelled “PARKING” and relates to ParkingEye.
>
> 4. Do not pay ParkingEye.
>
> To be clear: you are not authorised to make any payment to
ParkingEye in my name. You must not treat a private parking
invoice as if it were a penalty or fine.
>
> 5. Administration fee disputed.
>
> You state you “will attempt to charge the card” an
administration fee of £35. I dispute that any fee is due in
circumstances where you have demonstrated fundamental
misunderstanding of the nature of the allegation and have
provided no proper documentation.
>
> If you take any payment, I require (as a minimum) a full
itemised justification and the precise contractual clause you
rely upon, together with evidence that the clause is fair and
applicable to a private parking invoice.
>
> 6. Provide documents and confirm what you have done.
>
> Please provide by return:
>
> [indent]a. A copy of the actual ParkingEye notice you received
(all pages).
> b. Confirmation of the date you received it.
> c. Confirmation of exactly what you have provided to
ParkingEye (and on what date).
> d. Confirmation that you have not paid ParkingEye and will not
do so.[/indent][/indent]
>
> Given the above, your email will not be treated as anything
other than an incompetent, generic template wrongly describing a
civil parking invoice as a statutory enforcement matter. I
require written confirmation within 7 days that your records
have been corrected and that no payment will be made to
ParkingEye.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [HIRER NAME]
> [ADDRESS]
> [RENTAL AGREEMENT/CONTRACT NUMBER]
> [VEHICLE REG]
> [ENTERPRISE REFERENCE]
--- End Quote ---
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page